Practical Automotive SPICE (ASPICE) Support for Assessment-Ready Teams

Fixed-fee support for automotive teams that need stronger process capability, clearer evidence, and assessment readiness aligned to real delivery.

Request an ASPICE Quote
Mercedes-Logo-1
Volkswagen-Logo-200x80
Mitsubishi-Motors-Logo-1-200x80
PACCAR-Logo
ChargePoint-Logo
Panasonic-200x80
XPERI-Logo
Kollmorgen


Understanding Automotive SPICE

How Automotive SPICE Becomes Relevant in Practice

Automotive SPICE is the process assessment model for automotive systems and software development, but in practice it becomes relevant when engineering teams need stronger process capability, clearer traceability, and assessment-ready evidence.

What Automotive SPICE Establishes

Automotive SPICE establishes a process assessment model for evaluating capability across systems, software, project, support, and supplier processes.

When Automotive Teams Usually Need It

Automotive teams usually pursue ASPICE when OEMs or Tier 1 customers require demonstrated process capability across software and systems development.

Why It Starts to
Matter

Automotive SPICE starts to matter when delivery depends on inconsistent methods, weak traceability, unclear ownership, or evidence assembled too late.



WHERE YOU ARE IN THE PROCESS

Automotive Teams Pursuing ASPICE Usually Start From One of Three Realities

Automotive teams do not all arrive at ASPICE from the same place. In most cases, the initiative begins because OEM expectations, program complexity, process gaps, or assessment pressure is exposing weaknesses in development capability.

Understanding your starting point helps shape an ASPICE path that fits your process maturity, program scope, customer pressure, and assessment timeline.

Assessment Is Coming, but the Project Is Still Unclear

You know ASPICE is becoming necessary, but scope, target capability, effort, timing, and the right level of support still need to be defined.

Your Engineering Processes Need Structure Without Slowing Delivery

OEM pressure, program complexity, or growth may be pushing ASPICE forward, but process discipline must remain practical across delivery teams.

You Are Still Working Out What ASPICE Will Involve

You may still be clarifying which processes apply, what capability level is expected, and what assessment readiness means for your team.



For Internal Champions

If You Are Driving Automotive SPICE Internally, You Are Probably Being Asked to Clarify More Than the Assessment

Before Automotive SPICE improvement begins, someone inside the organization usually needs to define scope, estimate effort, shape a realistic timeline, and explain what support is needed. That is often where initiatives slow down before they properly begin.

“These are usually the questions that need answers before the project can move.”

Clear Scope

Define which programs, systems, software components, development teams, process areas, and target capability levels belong inside the assessment scope.

Internal Effort

Understand what leadership, systems, software, quality, project-management, validation, and process owners must contribute before implementation begins.

Realistic Timeline

Build a practical plan based on current process maturity, program complexity, evidence readiness, and the work required before assessment.

Practical Support

Set clear expectations around milestones, deliverables, support level, and project cost so the path to Automotive SPICE assessment is easier to approve.

Implementation support should strengthen engineering capability before it satisfies the assessment, giving teams clearer process ownership, better traceability, and stronger assessment readiness without turning Automotive SPICE into a documentation exercise.



What Automotive SPICE Solves

The Model Becomes Relevant When Informal Engineering Processes Start Creating Risk

Automotive SPICE usually becomes necessary when OEM expectations, program complexity, system dependencies, and assessment pressure start exposing the limits of informal development processes. This is where structured process capability begins to add real value.

Inconsistent Development Methods

Systems and software activities are performed differently across teams, projects, or suppliers, weakening consistency and process capability.

Weak Process
Ownership

Responsibilities for defining, deploying, measuring, and improving engineering processes are unclear across the organization.

Recurring Delivery Problems

The same quality, integration, schedule, or coordination issues return because process weaknesses are not addressed systematically.

Traceability and Evidence Gaps

Requirements, design, testing, changes, reviews, and decisions may not remain connected through complete and usable evidence.

Limited Program Visibility

Leadership lacks a clear view of process capability, program risk, evidence gaps, improvement progress, and assessment readiness.



WHY A TO Z Management Consulting

Why Engineering Teams Trust A to Z With Automotive SPICE

We do not force your organization into a generic engineering model. We adapt Automotive SPICE to your development lifecycle, project structure, customer expectations, and process responsibilities, so capability is easier to build and demonstrate.

100%

Success Rate

“We bring a strong track record across process maturity and automotive delivery environments, helping engineering teams move toward assessment readiness with an approach that holds up in practice.”

Fixed-Fee Support

Defined deliverables, clear project phases, and straightforward pricing make the engagement easier to evaluate internally and manage without hidden surprises.

Milestone Delivery

The work is structured around clear stages, so progress is visible, responsibilities are clearer, and assessment readiness is easier to plan.

Aligned to Engineering Delivery

Automotive SPICE is aligned to your actual systems, software, development lifecycle, suppliers, project governance, and customer expectations.

Less Documentation Burden

We focus on usable processes, complete traceability, and sustainable evidence so teams can demonstrate capability without excessive documentation.

Proprietary compliance software (optional add-on)

Compliance Command™ is our proprietary compliance management platform designed to help organizations implement, manage, and continually improve compliance and management systems through a single integrated solution.

Learn More


Our Automotive SPICE Services

Expert Support Across Every Stage of Automotive SPICE

Whether you are defining scope, improving process capability, preparing for assessment, or strengthening delivery visibility, we provide practical support across the full Automotive SPICE journey.

Consulting

Practical Guidance for Process Improvement
• Assessment scoping and planning
• Gap review and roadmap
• Process architecture design
• Documentation development

Auditing

Clear Visibility into Gaps and Readiness
• Process compliance reviews
• Findings and corrective action
• Evidence and traceability reviews
• Assessment readiness evaluation

Training

Practical Learning for Stronger Ownership
• ASPICE Awareness Sessions
• Process-owner training
• Assessor readiness training
• Traceability and Process Training

Software

Structured Visibility for System Management
• Integrated compliance platform
• Automated workflows and approvals
• Multi-standard compliance support
• Real-time readiness visibility



WHAT GOOD LOOKS LIKE

Engineering Processes That Work in Practice

Automotive SPICE readiness is visible when teams follow consistent processes, maintain traceability, generate usable evidence, and manage delivery through measurable capability.

Consistent Engineering Processes

Systems, software, project, support, and supplier processes are defined clearly and used consistently across development programs.

Complete Lifecycle Traceability

Requirements, architecture, design, implementation, testing, changes, and decisions remain connected through controlled evidence.

Clear Process Ownership

Process owners define, deploy, measure, review, and improve engineering processes across projects and organizational teams.

Assessment-Ready Evidence

Work products, records, reviews, measures, and decisions are complete, retrievable, and aligned to actual engineering delivery.



HOW IT WORKS

A Structured Automotive SPICE Improvement Approach

1

Gap Assessment

Review current engineering processes against Automotive SPICE and identify gaps affecting capability, traceability, evidence, and assessment readiness.

2

Process Development

Develop process assets, templates, work-product expectations, measures, and controls aligned to the development lifecycle and target capability.

3

Implementation

Embed defined systems, software, project, support, and supplier processes into active automotive development programs.

4

Internal Assessment

Test process performance, work products, traceability, evidence quality, and capability through structured internal assessment.

5

Readiness Review

Close remaining gaps, validate evidence, strengthen process adoption, and confirm program readiness before formal assessment.

6

Assessment Support

Support formal assessments by organizing evidence, preparing teams, clarifying process use, and presenting capability consistently.
Get Practical Automotive SPICE Guidance


Implementation Deliverables

What You’ll Have At The End Of The Project

By the time your teams are ready for assessment, you will have implemented Automotive SPICE processes that strengthen capability, traceability, evidence, and delivery consistency.

Core System Deliverables

Process Foundation

  • Processes defined and documented
  • Roles and responsibilities established
  • Engineering Controls and Measures in Place
  • Controlled Work Products and Records
  • Team Training and Awareness Completed
Audit Readiness Deliverables

Assessment Readiness

  • Internal Assessments Completed
  • Leadership Review Conducted
  • Improvement Actions Implemented
  • Objective Evidence Available
  • Assessment Readiness Demonstrated


Outcomes Beyond the Assessment

What Well-Implemented Automotive SPICE Processes Should Improve

The value of Automotive SPICE should extend beyond assessment. Well-implemented processes improve delivery capability, engineering visibility, review discipline, and customer confidence.

gears

More Predictable Engineering

  • consistent development execution
  • Clearer process ownership
  • Fewer delivery blind spots
Data-Driven Decisions

Data-Driven Decisions

  • More usable engineering data
  • Stronger capability visibility
  • Clearer improvement priorities
Audit Readiness

Readiness & Review Discipline

  • Clearer evidence and traceability
  • Better process review discipline
  • Reliable program oversight
Commercial Confidence

OEM & Customer Confidence

  • Stronger delivery credibility
  • More customer trust
  • Better program qualification


Who We Support

Supporting Automotive Teams Where Process Capability Affects Program Confidence

We support organizations where engineering discipline, lifecycle traceability, process evidence, and assessment readiness directly affect OEM confidence.

Automotive Software Developers

Process capability and traceability matter daily.

Embedded Systems Providers

System and software evidence must remain aligned.

Tier 1 Automotive Suppliers

OEM approval depends on capable processes.

Tier 2 Technology Suppliers

Customer expectations increasingly include ASPICE.

ECU And Electronics Providers

Development evidence must withstand assessment.

Engineering Service Companies

Consistent delivery supports program credibility.

Explore Your Automotive SPICE Readiness


Company Stats

A track record built across high-
accountability standards

A to Z Management Consulting supports organizations operating in environments where quality, consistency, and accountability directly affect performance and customer confidence. We turn certification requirements into practical implementation aligned with real operations, helping organizations achieve certification readiness without overengineering the system. Our long-term client relationships and 100% certification success rate reflect that trust.

100%

Successful Readiness Outcomes

1000+

Organizations Supported
Globally

30+

Regulated Standards Covered

20+

Years of Consulting Experience

“ I was hired to develop the ISO system to get this facility certified in ISO 9001 and 45001. I needed a system that could store our quality documents, track audits, and track corrective actions. The A to Z staff has been wonderful. They have provided support and upgrades that made the system more user friendly. They also helped with the initial gap analysis and internal audit to ensure we were on the right track in our certification journey. The outcome was fantastic, including getting certified on our first attempt. Michael L. Wherry ISO Coordinator, Komatsu
“ Our OEMs demanded that we get the TISAX Label within a certain timeframe if we wished to get continued contracts awarded. We had no TISAX expertise internally and needed external consulting. We came across the A to Z Management Consulting team, who had deep and superior experience. With A to Z’s team-based approach, deep experience, and superb management, we were able to attain our Information Security High Availability Label for two sites within six months. The return on our investment with A to Z has been immeasurable. We would definitely select them in the future when the need arises again. Karim Virjee Cybersecurity Program Manager, Woodbridge Foam Corporation
“ Managing multiple standards at the same time can quickly become complicated, but the commitment felt organized from the start. The A to Z Team was able to clearly break down the requirements, keep priorities aligned, and help us make significant progress without creating unnecessary bureaucracy. Their breadth of experience across different frameworks was evident throughout the process. Additionally, their practical and collaborative approach managed to involve process owners, ensuring that activities were not only carried out effectively but also reviewed and validated by their expert team in standards such as ISO 9001, ISO 14001 and ISO 45001. Their specialized advice allowed us to optimize our management systems and achieve our quality, environmental and safety objectives efficiently and sustainably. Vanessa Aguilar Quality Engineer, ChargePoint
“ We needed a partner who understood that certification work still has to fit around the realities of running the business day to day. A to Z did a great job of balancing structure with flexibility. Their guidance was thorough, easy to follow, and never felt heavier than it needed to be. That made a real difference for our team. Trent Tucker General Manager, American Carton Company
“ We began working with A to Z Management Consulting during our initial ISO 9001 implementation and have continued the relationship with their team ever since. Their ability to clearly explain the standard, and pending standard updates, has made it easier for our team to stay aligned and informed. The A to Z team approaches audits with a level of detail and organization that helps us prepare effectively and move into accreditation audits with confidence. Since our accreditation, we have successfully completed every external audit without a non-conformity, something we attribute to a strong internal system, supported by the guidance and structure A to Z provides. A to Z has been a valuable partner in strengthening our quality management efforts. Megan Pogwist General Manager, Packaging HERO
“ A to Z Management Consulting delivered highly effective ISO 14001 training with a strong focus on operational execution and audit readiness. The program translated requirements into clear, actionable practices, enabling our teams to quickly align processes, close gaps, and improve consistency across the organization. As a result, we saw accelerated readiness for certification activities and greater confidence at both the leadership and operational levels. The engagement was professional, results-driven, and directly supported our environmental management objectives. Kaveh Moraghebi Vice President, Quality, Regulatory & Sustainability, ALOM
“ We were not familiar with ISO, and A to Z was able to provide assistance from the ground up. Our experience has been great. A to Z has a knowledgeable team with clear and responsive communication. Strong knowledge and experience stood out throughout the engagement, and we have successfully passed ISO audits, which is a strong result. Isabelle Jung P.Q.D. International Inc.
“ After losing our Quality Supervisor, we needed immediate support to achieve ISO 9001 and ISO 14001 certification. A to Z quickly understood our situation and the limitations of our internal resources. From the start, they took the lead, provided a clear path forward, and guided us through building the required documentation and processes without overwhelming our team. What stood out most was A to Z’s ability to translate ISO requirements into clear, practical terms. As a result, we successfully achieved both ISO 9001 and ISO 14001 certification, and we gained a solid understanding of how to maintain and continually improve our system going forward. Carol Smith EHS Manager, Westwater Resources
“ Before working with A to Z, we did not fully understand what it takes to develop an Information Security Management System that meets ISO 27001 standard applicable to our business. The team was patient, knowledgeable, and able to explain difficult terminology and system requirements in simple terms. Their support gave us the clarity we needed to successfully pass the audit and get certified. Chrissy Ervin JDM List Services
“ I was compelled to work with A to Z Management Consulting for our ISO 13485 after learning that the team’s approach was not only to deliver an ISO-certified quality system, but to help optimize the business system altogether. We were assigned a masterclass consultant who had a deep understanding of the ISO standards. Our consultant took apart our existing ISO 9001 system and rebuilt it piece by piece on a foundation of basic quality fundamentals. Having worked with other quality consulting firms, I can comfortably rate the quality system we developed with A to Z as being of the highest caliber. Marios D. Demetriou, PhD Co-Founder and CEO, Glassimetal Technology
“ We engaged A to Z Management Consulting to pursue our first ISO certification under a very aggressive timeline. The experience was smooth and efficient, with their auditor committed to supporting us from start to finish. We appreciated their project management software and schedule. The FFP (outcome-based) arrangement helped us control costs as a small business. As a result, we were recommended for accreditation by our external auditor. We look forward to working with A to Z Management Consulting for future certifications. Sonia Mundra COO, EnProVera Corporation
“ I worked with Simon and his team when we were working towards our ISO9001 certification. We had policies in place but not in an organized fashion. A to Z management consulting came in and took care of the administrative tasks, organizing our team, holding meetings and holding people accountable so we could get our certification completed in record time. We kept working with A to Z Management after we successfully passed our first audit to ensure we stayed on track and they helped us train our quality lead so we could be self-sufficient. I highly recommend Simon and A to Z Management. They made a complex application process and system simple and straight forward. They are extremely knowledgeable. Larry Glick Marketing Manager, Asahi Refining USA, Inc.
“ We have been working with A to Z Management Consulting since 2020, when they initially helped us develop and implement our Quality Management System and successfully prepare for ISO 9001 certification. Since then, they have continued to support us with our annual internal audits and certification readiness. Their team has been knowledgeable, responsive, and easy to work with, and their practical approach has helped us maintain our QMS and stay prepared for our certification audits year after year. We value the ongoing relationship and appreciate the consistent support A to Z Management Consulting has provided to our team. Jay Patel President, Accurate Rubber Corporation
“ Toluca Foods initially engaged A to Z Management Consulting after receiving a strong recommendation from another customer and recognizing the need to obtain SQF certification for our facility. From the beginning, the experience was excellent. A to Z provided clear guidance, structure, and support throughout the entire process. What stood out most was the professionalism and personalized approach, ensuring that our specific operational needs were fully understood and addressed. Thanks to this partnership, we achieved SQF certification and earned an Excellent rating on our first audit, a milestone that added significant value and credibility to our organization. Mauricio Hidalgo Head of Operations, Toluca Foods

ASPICE Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

What is Automotive SPICE in simple terms?

Automotive SPICE is a process assessment model used to evaluate how effectively automotive systems, software, hardware, and related engineering activities are planned, performed, controlled, and improved. 

In simple terms, it helps automotive organizations show that development work is not dependent on informal practices or individual knowledge. Requirements, architecture, implementation, testing, project management, configuration, quality assurance, and problem resolution are expected to operate through defined processes supported by objective evidence.

ASPICE is a commonly used abbreviation for Automotive SPICE. 

SPICE originally refers to Software Process Improvement and Capability Determination. 

The official name is Automotive SPICE®, which is a registered trademark of the VDA Quality Management Center. In formal page copy and technical documents, “Automotive SPICE” is preferable to using ASPICE as though it were the official title. 

Automotive SPICE is a process reference and assessment model used widely across the automotive industry. 

It is aligned with the ISO/IEC 330xx family of process-assessment standards, but it is not an ISO management-system certification standard like ISO 9001 or ISO/IEC 27001. 

It defines automotive development processes, expected outcomes, process practices, work products, process attributes, and capability-level assessment rules.

Not in the conventional organizational sense. 

Automotive SPICE assessments produce capability ratings for selected processes within defined projects or process instances. They do not normally produce a permanent organization-wide certificate stating that the company is “ASPICE certified.” 

More accurate language includes: 

  • Assessed against Automotive SPICE 
  • Automotive SPICE assessment completed 
  • Processes assessed at Capability Level 2 
  • Automotive SPICE readiness achieved 
  • Automotive SPICE assessment result available 

Assessors themselves can hold recognized Automotive SPICE qualifications through the intacs scheme. 

The term should be used carefully. 

A company may have projects or processes assessed against Automotive SPICE, but the assessment result applies to the defined scope, process instances, projects, sites, and assessment conditions. 

It does not automatically prove that every project, product, team, or location operates at the same capability level. 

More precise wording identifies: 

  • The assessed project 
  • The assessed processes 
  • The capability levels achieved 
  • The model version 
  • The assessment date 
  • The assessment scope

Automotive SPICE is most relevant for organizations that develop automotive systems, software, electronic hardware, embedded products, or engineering services for vehicle manufacturers and automotive suppliers. 

That can include: 

  • Tier 1 automotive suppliers 
  • Tier 2 engineering suppliers 
  • ECU developers 
  • Embedded-software companies 
  • Automotive software vendors 
  • Electronics suppliers 
  • Hardware-development organizations 
  • Autonomous-driving technology providers 
  • Infotainment suppliers 
  • Battery-management system developers 
  • Powertrain-control suppliers 
  • Vehicle connectivity providers 
  • Automotive cybersecurity teams 
  • Engineering service providers 
  • Testing and validation companies 

The need is normally driven by OEM or higher-tier customer expectations.

Automotive SPICE usually becomes necessary when automotive customers require more structured and defensible engineering processes. 

That often happens when: 

  • An OEM requires an assessment 
  • A Tier 1 supplier flows requirements to subcontractors 
  • Software complexity increases 
  • Customer milestones require process evidence 
  • Project quality issues begin recurring 
  • Requirements and testing lose traceability 
  • Engineering teams use inconsistent methods 
  • Safety or cybersecurity requirements increase 
  • Supplier approval depends on capability ratings 
  • Customer assessors need objective evidence 

At that point, Automotive SPICE becomes both a customer-qualification requirement and an engineering-governance issue.

Automotive SPICE is not universally mandated by law. 

It may become mandatory through: 

  • OEM supplier requirements 
  • Customer contracts 
  • Sourcing conditions 
  • Development agreements 
  • Supplier-quality manuals 
  • Project milestones 
  • Customer-specific requirements 
  • Program-assurance requirements 
  • Tender or procurement criteria 

Automotive suppliers should identify the exact processes, capability levels, model version, and assessment expectations required by each customer.

In many cases, yes. 

Early implementation gives the organization time to improve requirements quality, traceability, architecture, testing, configuration management, quality assurance, and project control before a customer assessment creates urgency. 

Waiting until an OEM assessment is scheduled often results in rushed documentation, retrospective evidence creation, and process changes that teams have not yet adopted.

Yes. 

Automotive customers use Automotive SPICE assessments to evaluate whether suppliers can develop complex automotive products through controlled and repeatable engineering processes. 

A credible capability result may support: 

  • Supplier nomination 
  • Sourcing decisions 
  • Project award 
  • Customer milestone approval 
  • Program continuation 
  • Risk classification 
  • Corrective-action expectations 
  • New-business qualification 

An assessment result does not guarantee contract award, but weak process capability can create a serious commercial disadvantage.

Automotive SPICE can improve how engineering work is planned, connected, controlled, and reviewed. 

The broader value may include: 

  • Clearer requirements 
  • Stronger traceability 
  • Better architectural discipline 
  • More reliable testing 
  • Improved change control 
  • Stronger project visibility 
  • Better configuration management 
  • More disciplined problem resolution 
  • Clearer quality-assurance independence 
  • Reduced dependence on individuals 
  • Better reuse across projects 
  • Stronger customer confidence 

The best implementations improve engineering delivery rather than only producing assessment evidence.

The current version is Automotive SPICE 4.0, published in December 2023. 

It replaced Automotive SPICE 3.1 and is the current official process reference and assessment model published by VDA QMC. 

New implementation and readiness programs should generally use Automotive SPICE 4.0 unless a customer has explicitly required Version 3.1 for a defined project or transition period. 

Organizations with existing Version 3.1 processes should perform a structured transition assessment rather than merely updating document references. 

Customer expectations remain important because some long-running vehicle programs may continue using an earlier agreed assessment baseline.

Automotive SPICE 4.0 introduced significant changes to process structure, terminology, process outcomes, practices, and assessment expectations. 

Major developments include: 

  • Addition of hardware-engineering processes 
  • Addition of machine-learning engineering processes 
  • Updated system- and software-engineering content 
  • Stronger consistency across engineering disciplines 
  • Revised process groups and process relationships 
  • Updated assessment indicators 
  • Alignment with modern automotive development 
  • Greater support for complex, multidisciplinary products 

The transition should be treated as an engineering-process change, not a document-renaming exercise.

Yes. 

Automotive SPICE 4.0 includes hardware-engineering processes so organizations can assess hardware development through the same broader process-capability framework. 

This is especially relevant for organizations developing: 

  • Electronic control units 
  • Sensors 
  • Power electronics 
  • Control modules 
  • Automotive computing platforms 
  • Communication devices 
  • Embedded electronic components 

Hardware processes still need to connect effectively with system, software, project, quality, and configuration-management activities.

Yes. 

Version 4.0 introduces machine-learning engineering processes intended to address development activities involving machine-learning components. 

These processes help organizations apply greater structure to matters such as: 

  • Machine-learning requirements 
  • Data 
  • Training 
  • Model development 
  • Evaluation 
  • Integration 
  • Verification 
  • Traceability 
  • Change control 
  • Supporting work products 

Machine-learning development still needs to coordinate with system, software, safety, cybersecurity, and product-governance activities.

The Process Reference Model, commonly called the PRM, defines the processes included in Automotive SPICE. 

For each process, it identifies matters such as: 

  • Process purpose 
  • Expected process outcomes 
  • Process relationships 
  • Scope of the process 

The PRM explains what the process is intended to accomplish.

The Process Assessment Model, commonly called the PAM, provides the indicators used to evaluate process implementation and capability. 

It includes: 

  • Base practices 
  • Output work products 
  • Generic practices 
  • Generic resources 
  • Process attributes 
  • Rating guidance 
  • Capability-level indicators 

The PAM helps assessors determine whether process outcomes and capability attributes are supported by sufficient objective evidence.

The PRM defines what each process is intended to achieve. 

The PAM provides indicators for assessing whether the process has achieved its purpose and how capable the process is. 

In practical terms: 

  • The PRM defines expected process outcomes. 
  • The PAM supports evidence-based assessment. 
  • The capability dimension evaluates how well the process is managed, established, measured, and improved.

Automotive SPICE assesses the capability of selected engineering and supporting processes within a defined project or organizational context. 

Assessment may examine areas such as: 

  • Requirements elicitation 
  • System requirements 
  • System architecture 
  • Software requirements 
  • Software architecture 
  • Detailed design 
  • Implementation 
  • Unit verification 
  • Integration 
  • Qualification testing 
  • Project management 
  • Configuration management 
  • Quality assurance 
  • Problem resolution 
  • Change-request management 
  • Supplier monitoring 
  • Hardware engineering 
  • Machine-learning engineering 

The exact process scope is agreed for the assessment.

Not necessarily. 

Automotive SPICE assessments normally focus on defined process instances within selected projects, products, teams, sites, or organizational units. 

A company may have one project operating at Capability Level 2 while another project has weaker process implementation. 

The assessment scope should therefore state clearly what was evaluated and what was not.